My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister, Minister for Education, Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations and Minister for Social Inclusion. I refer the minister to the Northern Territory government’s internal advice that nearly 13 per cent of the schools stimulus package funding will be soaked up in project management fees of up to $400,000 per school. Does the minister maintain that this represents value for money for the Australian taxpayer?

I had anticipated a question to the Minister for Foreign Affairs but I am of course happy to answer the question of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. On the deputy leader’s question, as I have had cause to explain in the House before, the Building the Education Revolution guidelines set clear specifications for the amount of money that can be spent on project management fees and also the amount that can be spent on administration costs. On project management fees the amount is four per cent, on administration costs it is 1.5 per cent.

I believe that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is probably referring to an article which was recently in the newspaper—

Ms Julie Bishop interjecting

Well, it may have been an article based on the advice that she is now showing. But I am aware of those reports, and obviously, when we see reports that there is an expenditure beyond what the guidelines provide for, we look into it. But the arrangements between us and state governments and block grant authorities in the Catholic and independent sectors are very, very clear. We made those guidelines clear because we wanted to ensure that project costs and administration costs were kept to a minimum and that this money rolled out to schools to support jobs now.

What I would say to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition—and I would say it to all members of the opposition—is that at the end of the day the central part of this debate is: do you support jobs today? Do you support building infrastructure for tomorrow?

Order! The question has been asked.

You have already decisively answered no to both questions. You stand neither for supporting jobs nor for modernising schools. Then, of course, given that the question was asked by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, I would remind the Deputy Leader of the Opposition that when she was Minister for Education—

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: this is a question about a $400,000 rip-off by the Northern Territory government with project managers; it is not about anything else, and the minister should answer the question about value for money.

Order! The member for Sturt should not add debate into his point of order. The member will resume his seat.

Why didn’t you get that question?

Yes—a very interesting question from the Minister for Finance and Deregulation. But I remind the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, given that she has raised the question of school capital, that when she was Minister for Education, Science and Training, as I referred to in the House yesterday, of course the Investing in Our Schools Program was costed on an 80 per cent take-up rate and she needed to fix an 18 per cent blow-out in it.